↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Systemic administration of local anesthetic agents to relieve neuropathic pain

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2005
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (89th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (61st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
16 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
265 Mendeley
Title
Systemic administration of local anesthetic agents to relieve neuropathic pain
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2005
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd003345.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Vidya Challapalli, Ivo W Tremont-Lukats, Ewan D McNicol, Joseph Lau, Daniel B Carr

Abstract

Lidocaine, mexiletine, tocainide, and flecainide are local anesthetics which give an analgesic effect when administered orally or parenterally. Early reports described the use of intravenous lidocaine or procaine to relieve cancer and postoperative pain (Keats 1951; Gilbert 1951; De Clive-Lowe 1958; Bartlett 1961). Interest reappeared decades later when patient series and clinical trials reported that parenteral lidocaine and its oral analogs tocainide, mexiletine, and flecainide relieved neuropathic pain in some patients (Boas 1982; Lindblom 1984; Petersen 1986; Dunlop 1988; Bach 1990; Awerbuch 1990). With the recent publication of clinical trials with high quality standards, we have reviewed the use of systemic lidocaine and its oral analogs in neuropathic pain to update our knowledge, to measure their benefit and harm, and to better define their role in therapy.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 16 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 265 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Hong Kong 1 <1%
Japan 1 <1%
New Zealand 1 <1%
Unknown 257 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 31 12%
Other 27 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 26 10%
Student > Postgraduate 26 10%
Student > Master 25 9%
Other 62 23%
Unknown 68 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 112 42%
Nursing and Health Professions 20 8%
Psychology 11 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 11 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 3%
Other 30 11%
Unknown 73 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 April 2023.
All research outputs
#3,452,326
of 23,853,707 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#6,216
of 12,789 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,610
of 60,254 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#22
of 55 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,853,707 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,789 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 33.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 60,254 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 55 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% of its contemporaries.